Re: More California

>
>Chris Martin wrote:
>
>>> Why don't they
>start The Gay and Lesbian Scouts of America or The Atheist Scouts
>of America? Is it
>because they are afraid they would fail? <<
>
>Chris:
>
>In some other countries, there are separate scout organizations for
>groups with different agendas (in Ireland, for example, there is a
>scouting organization which mainly has protestants as members, and
>another organization with catholics as members).
>
>What you suggest can't be done here

I guess they could if they can do it if they can live with not
calling themselves Scouts. Campfire and Royal Rangers do it.

>, because the BSA national
>charter grants them exclusive rights to the term "Scouts". You
>can't start another organization and call it "scouting". Only the
>BSA is allowed to be a member of the World Organization of Scouting
>Movements (WOSM). Only BSA is allowed to send representatives to
>events like world Jamborees.
>
>My own personal position is that I am not in favour of changing
>anything in the oath and the law. Char lie Morrison's excellent
>post sums up my feelings very well. I'd rather have these boys
>here, where they can see the results of following the oath and law.
>
But they how can they promise to live by the Oath if they delete
part of it? Which is what happened in the Randall case.
Or are you folks saying it is not that important
to promise to live by the Oath and Law, and so we should delete
it as a requirement. I'm confused.

-bill

--
---
"A NATION owes its success, not so much to its strength
in armaments, as to the amount of character in its citizens."
  - Lord Baden-Powell, founder of the Scout Movement




 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

 Next message
 Previous message
 Maybe in reply to



Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City